Inside the $1.6B Plan to Restart Three Mile Island | WSJ

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 27 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 2,2 тис.

  • @samfisher874
    @samfisher874 14 днів тому +1559

    Utility engineer here. At 0:24 the units are wrong. The narrator says "90,000 GW an hour" (units GW/h) but probably meant to say "90,000 GW-hours" (units GWh). It's a subtle difference to someone not familiar w the units, but the first makes no sense in this context.
    Edit: The video is now corrected and the narrator now says it correctly w a note at the end. Thanks WSJ. =]

    • @JmJmmmmm
      @JmJmmmmm 14 днів тому +13

      That's approx 10,000MW. Basically 5,000MW each year

    • @jm9371
      @jm9371 14 днів тому +60

      As a random consumer, I saw 90 Giga-somethings. Sounds like a lot; all I needed to know.

    • @parg60
      @parg60 14 днів тому +4

      i just wanted to write this

    • @zapfanzapfan
      @zapfanzapfan 14 днів тому +7

      Yeah, 90 000 GWh, or 90 TWh. That's quite a lot if it's for AI alone. That's 10 GW continuous power, or about 12 Three Mile Island reactors worth.

    • @jayelwin
      @jayelwin 13 днів тому +14

      I was arguing with someone who insisted on asking “how many watts per hour”. He couldn’t understand why that made no sense. But he owned a boat. I asked him how fast his boat could go, how many “knots per hour”. He finally got it.

  • @mickolesmana5899
    @mickolesmana5899 14 днів тому +2589

    Nuclear power is similar to the aircraft industry. The general public fears its most catastrophic failures so much that we forgot both coal and cars have a significantly higher death toll compared to these two.
    Edit : Do you realize that all your comments actually prove that nuclear technology is safe? Why? Because, innately, all of you are already aware of the worst possible effects-it’s ingrained in your minds. In aviation, we call this a "safety culture." When we design something, we consciously and unconsciously strive to create the safest design possible. But i get it natural disaster and idiot people are inevitable

    • @AlexWaardenburg
      @AlexWaardenburg 14 днів тому +83

      Very good comparison

    • @normang3668
      @normang3668 14 днів тому +102

      Yep. Coal has a significantly higher death toll, even when it's functioning as intended.

    • @DoubleGoon
      @DoubleGoon 14 днів тому +62

      Of course, Microsoft is using the plant to power their AI where it was originally brining power 800,000 people. Now the surrounding area faces the same risk, but not the reward.

    • @setharp
      @setharp 14 днів тому +72

      They aren't at all similar. Because at the end of the day all it takes is one major failure at a single nuclear power plants to make vast swaths of the area around it permanently uninhabitable.

    • @AlexWaardenburg
      @AlexWaardenburg 14 днів тому +66

      @setharp except that happens from the normal operation of coal power plants.

  • @GoldenTV3
    @GoldenTV3 14 днів тому +1883

    Three Mile Island is like the anti-Chernobyl; At Chernobyl, the poorly made reactor exploded and caused a huge catastrophe, while the government denied the severity of the problem, whereas at Three Mile Island, the incident was relatively minor, the reactor didn’t explode, but everyone around totally freaked out about it.

    • @LeonFisher-Skipper
      @LeonFisher-Skipper 14 днів тому +122

      Calling a reactor meltdown „relatively minor“ is something. 😂
      That’s literally the worst case scenario, even though it could be contained.

    • @schalitz1
      @schalitz1 14 днів тому +116

      There is no such thing as a "minor" Nuclear accident. While Nuclear energy has great potential you need the smartest people around. Not DEI hires.

    • @thecrackin-u8p
      @thecrackin-u8p 14 днів тому +26

      A meltdown is a meltdown

    • @ETJeanMachine
      @ETJeanMachine 14 днів тому +184

      ​@@schalitz1 what on earth does DEI - which has nothing to do with hiring practices btw, it's a corporate training word - have to do with 3MI?

    • @Stefan-st
      @Stefan-st 14 днів тому +5

      The heat couldn’t be transported away from the reactor. Thats extremely bad.

  • @kfactorprime
    @kfactorprime 13 днів тому +273

    At 0:38 I can't believe you drew boxes around cooling towers, and called them reactors. You got the distance right, but cooling towers aren't reactors. The reactors are actually the buildings in the middle of the two sets of cooling towers, each being identifiable by its dome-shaped roof.

    • @TheRealCharlieSuper
      @TheRealCharlieSuper 13 днів тому +28

      For whatever reason, many people see the cooling towers as the 'big bad' reactor...

    • @06howea1
      @06howea1 13 днів тому +13

      Misinformation from the Wall Street Journall

    • @eddiewillers1
      @eddiewillers1 10 днів тому +7

      @@06howea1 Did you expect objectivity and accuracy from the WSJ?

    • @anthonykaiser974
      @anthonykaiser974 9 днів тому +1

      @@TheRealCharlieSuper yeah, we have an Indiana & Michigan plant at Rockport, Indiana near the Ohio River that they built in the early 80s with two big cooling towers, which to me was different. It's a coal fired plant that always got it's coal from Wyoming, because our local Illinois Basin coal is dirty. Now I hear they're talking about putting a Small Modular Reactor there. After the debacle with Marble Hill (near Hanover in SE Indiana), which basically was in construction and halted after the TMI incident, that was a surprise.

    • @lexluthor6906
      @lexluthor6906 9 днів тому +2

      its the perfect demonstration of the problem. no matter how many youtube videos people watch, 99% of the population doesnt understand how these things work but they think they do. dunning kruger in full effect.

  • @shezadshah3740
    @shezadshah3740 13 днів тому +298

    Why are they reopening these power plants for mega corporations and AI, instead of to strengthen our energy grid and lower energy costs for Americans.

    • @EbonySaints
      @EbonySaints 13 днів тому +63

      Because we don't matter. They only bothered with this because Nvidia's top of the line GPU requires as much energy as a hundred average homes per hour.
      Goes to show who's really represented as far as our elected officials go.

    • @DaveMiller2
      @DaveMiller2 11 днів тому

      We don't matter to them. They want $$$, power, and control.

    • @adog7787
      @adog7787 10 днів тому +21

      You literally contradicted yourself and answered your own question

    • @omegathan
      @omegathan 10 днів тому +27

      You and I don't matter, we live in an oligarchy made to serve billionaires and their interests

    • @DaveMiller2
      @DaveMiller2 10 днів тому +7

      They want the AI for something that serves themselves. And there may be other reasons they aren't talking about as well. Nefarious reasons.

  • @zantrua
    @zantrua 14 днів тому +684

    90,000 GW per hour? Please for the love of god, you're a major news company, please talk to an engineer before publishing things.

    • @wumi2419
      @wumi2419 14 днів тому +84

      They probably ran it through AI and decided it's a good enough substitute.

    • @AMPProf
      @AMPProf 13 днів тому +8

      We on WALL STREET we know

    • @davidanalyst671
      @davidanalyst671 13 днів тому +3

      this power plant was able to power the eastern half of the United States. lolz

    • @FrozenHaxor
      @FrozenHaxor 13 днів тому +9

      Typical AI slop, how embarrassing.

    • @Ace-990
      @Ace-990 13 днів тому +2

      You just rewrote the other comment as an inslut.

  • @aestheticstudio007
    @aestheticstudio007 14 днів тому +663

    The US should never have gave up on Nuclear !

    • @Fekillix
      @Fekillix 14 днів тому +16

      Absolutely. Russia is building 6 new plants locally, and they have 10 nuclear power plant projects going on abroad. That technology should come from USA and Europe.

    • @dennisallen8333
      @dennisallen8333 14 днів тому +7

      The US haven’t given up on Nuclear Weapons?

    • @jfitz7777
      @jfitz7777 14 днів тому +17

      @@dennisallen8333 Weapons =/= power

    • @hansfranz3322
      @hansfranz3322 14 днів тому +25

      @@jfitz7777 The US never gave u on it. The market did, as nuclear power plants are practically THE MOST EXPENSIVE power source there is. They are just not economically viable with MASSIVE subsidies.

    • @ryanwalters6184
      @ryanwalters6184 14 днів тому +12

      It became so expensive that the companies went bankrupt. South Carolina, we spent billions of dollars and had to cancel the plant after the company went under. The cost just went out of control

  • @andersonlynn3686
    @andersonlynn3686 14 днів тому +1064

    We have nuclear aircraft carriers and submarines and we can’t handle power plants that are stationary ????

    • @ryanwalters6184
      @ryanwalters6184 14 днів тому +39

      We can but they're just too expensive.

    • @harrie205
      @harrie205 14 днів тому +54

      Military stuff does not have to be economically viable (nuclear is bad at that)
      Also because they move, spacious limitations are much more relevant (nuclear is good at that)

    • @Mike__B
      @Mike__B 14 днів тому +112

      @@harrie205 That first point, exactly. "We need to get costs down, so that stockholders get a good return for their investment..." is not something that was ever uttered by a nuclear powered aircraft carrier captain.

    • @holycrapchris
      @holycrapchris 14 днів тому +32

      TMI-1 produces 15x more power than an Ohio-class submarine. And TMI-1 is near my house.... submarines aren't.

    • @patfre
      @patfre 14 днів тому +7

      @@Mike__Bpeople already have and its called micro reactors. They are smaller, safer and basically costs pennies compared to a big one. The problem is just that companies wants to make giant ugly extremely expensive towers

  • @survivaloptions4999
    @survivaloptions4999 12 днів тому +121

    I don't have a problem with recommissioning a nuclear reactor. The idea that Microsoft AI is going to require gigawatts of power terrifies me. I hope the robots enjoy the world they inherit.

    • @PMaynard-22
      @PMaynard-22 10 днів тому +3

      Alot of it is Air conditioning. Which epa just screwed with new regs that will just end up taking more energy as government is all our problems.

    • @haruhisuzumiya6650
      @haruhisuzumiya6650 10 днів тому +1

      ​@@PMaynard-22worse than that, acid rain

    • @richardbarron8869
      @richardbarron8869 8 днів тому +3

      THE ROBOTS WILL ACCIDENTLY DECLARE WAR ON EACH OTHER AND THEY'LL BURN THE PLANET TO CHARRED EARTH! BET ME! THE NEXT PERSON TO TELL ME TO "EMBRACE THE TECHNOLOGY" I WILL WISH THIS UPON!

    • @bain5872
      @bain5872 7 днів тому +3

      @@haruhisuzumiya6650 Um.... acid rain come from coal burning power plants not nuclear plants.

    • @Bapuji42
      @Bapuji42 6 днів тому

      It might even be worth it if the AI took over the world. Sadly it will just provide wrong answers and bad decisions.

  • @beaustrahm7703
    @beaustrahm7703 13 днів тому +485

    This "Report" lost all credibility within the first 45 seconds of the video. First off, the Three Mile Island incident was not a full nuclear meltdown, but a meltdown of communication and the media (which this video is now an example of) Secondly, it is not the worst nuclear incident in American history BY FAR. No one died, and in fact no one has ever been reported to have had any negative symptoms from the incident. The only fatal nuclear incident in America was in 1961 where 3 men tragically died at a test reactor in Idaho. Lastly, 90,000,000,000 w/hr? That's more than Doc and Marty needed to get back to the year 1985! There's definitely a story here. Hopefully someone with some knowledge of nuclear history picks it up.

    • @CorJ0nas
      @CorJ0nas 13 днів тому +15

      The rods melted nevertheless...
      Block 2 will never work again.

    • @imeakdo7
      @imeakdo7 13 днів тому +11

      Not a meltdown? Wow. Do you call rods melting a not meltdown? That's a serious underestimation to say the least. It made corium there's no debating that. It was one very expensive mistake that was later fixed

    • @perryallan3524
      @perryallan3524 13 днів тому +31

      Retired Nuclear Plant Engineer here: It was a partial meltdown. There have been a number of other partial meltdowns with test reactors. While we won't know until they get into the reactors at Fukushima; those are also likely partial meltdowns.

    • @WobbuffetWobbuffet
      @WobbuffetWobbuffet 13 днів тому +2

      That is not the only fatal nuclear accident in the U.S. lol so how are you credible either?

    • @JosephHHHo
      @JosephHHHo 13 днів тому +2

      What do you/they mean by W/hr anyway?

  • @antor_khan
    @antor_khan 13 днів тому +114

    The explanation of the accident has multiple inaccuracies starting at about 2:10. consulting with an expert before publishing misinformation would have been nice from WSJ.

    • @evaprendergast2394
      @evaprendergast2394 12 днів тому +4

      Pretty sure they’re showing inspections of the steam generator tubes at 2:26, which is not where the leak occurred. That’s not a similar leak to a primary relief valve being stuck open.

    • @HeinousAnusOG
      @HeinousAnusOG 11 днів тому +10

      All these errors coming from such a huge news outlet is one of the major reasons a lot of people have incorrect and bad opinion about nuclear

    • @mediocreman2
      @mediocreman2 9 днів тому +1

      Oh, they definitely consulted with an expert at least in their minds. AI.

    • @Nihilist_Saint
      @Nihilist_Saint 9 днів тому

      The media are the ones who made TMI out to be exponentially worse than it actually was. Its sort of the standard for mainstream media to publish Yellow Journalism articles on nuclear, or really anything scientific that requires an expert to adequately explain; even then the lowest common denominator of the populous probably won't understand anything more complex than "A good, B bad." so they sell the "A good, B bad" narrative.

    • @Forbes123
      @Forbes123 5 днів тому +1

      When she said that the transformer's job was to move energy from the plant onto the grid I just closed the video and gave up.

  • @BeaudoinEric
    @BeaudoinEric 11 днів тому +32

    I'm far from a nuclear energy expert (though I have an interest in how nuclear energy works) but Three Mile Island did not meltdown, only part of the core melted down. When the narrator said "the site of America's worst nuclear meltdown", they revealed a lot about their opinions on nuclear energy. Seems like fearmongering to me. I am no scientist but there is a difference between a partial core melt down and "the worst nuclear meltdown".

    • @HanzBlitz-i8t
      @HanzBlitz-i8t 7 днів тому

      It was in fact a meltdown, and it remains the worst meltdown in the US, even of it wasn't as bad as others.

    • @mitchyoung93
      @mitchyoung93 6 днів тому +1

      It didn't melt down...only part of it melted down...LOL>

    • @mitchyoung93
      @mitchyoung93 6 днів тому +1

      It didn't melt down...only part of it melted down...LOL>

    • @HanzBlitz-i8t
      @HanzBlitz-i8t 6 днів тому

      @@mitchyoung93 My ice cubes turned to water.
      "Melt" is a state of mind.

    • @BeaudoinEric
      @BeaudoinEric 6 днів тому +2

      @@mitchyoung93 What I was trying to say (again, I’m not anything of a nuclear power expert) is that, from my understanding, there is a difference between a total meltdown and a partial meltdown. The narrator seemed to think it was appropriate in this case to leave out the distinction, with the effect being that people think the whole reactor melted down. Think of it like someone saying “there was a collision involving several vehicles” when one car door-dinged another. The severity of it is very different and it seems intentional that it was not more clearly stated.

  • @AlanTheBeast100
    @AlanTheBeast100 13 днів тому +56

    @1:14 The towers are not the reactors. The reactor buildings are the smaller cylinder shaped buildings near the rectangular building in the middle.
    @1:54 Those rods at the top are the control rods - they drop into the reactor to moderate the reaction (or pretty much stop it if all the way in)

    • @johndaisley6168
      @johndaisley6168 13 днів тому +5

      Moderation refers to the slowing down of neutrons, not the absorbing of them. Water is the moderator, but the control rods do stop the reaction. I'm guessing you already know that, but I want to clarify for others reading this comment.

    • @imeakdo7
      @imeakdo7 13 днів тому +3

      Omg the video has tons of ai slop

    • @ilovecops5499
      @ilovecops5499 6 днів тому

      No. Those are fuel rods. They are inside the reactor and aw lowered to make it hotter and take our to stop it.

    • @AlanTheBeast100
      @AlanTheBeast100 6 днів тому

      @@ilovecops5499 You are dead wrong - control rods drop from the top between the fuel bundles

    • @AlanTheBeast100
      @AlanTheBeast100 6 днів тому

      @ Good points - thanks.

  • @filipporiva1864
    @filipporiva1864 13 днів тому +161

    1:51 I'm pretty sure what you're showing is a control rod and not a fuel rod, who did you consult for the animation?

    • @imeakdo7
      @imeakdo7 13 днів тому +11

      That's ai slop

    • @rnl9520
      @rnl9520 13 днів тому +1

      It's a Rod 4 Sure!

    • @matthewbeasley7765
      @matthewbeasley7765 13 днів тому

      Correct.

    • @Muonium1
      @Muonium1 13 днів тому +10

      Obviously nobody considering they start out the very first 20 seconds by demonstrating they have no idea what the concept of power or watts mean at all, lol.
      "Microsoft could need over 90,000 gigawatts an hour to fuel AI"
      🤣
      brb, I'm gonna go fill up my car with 250 miles per hour of gasoline, lol.

    • @vipecrx
      @vipecrx 11 днів тому

      musk

  • @maineiacman
    @maineiacman 13 днів тому +150

    Imagine if cavemen stopped using fire the first time a village burned.

    • @Cecil-yc6mc
      @Cecil-yc6mc 13 днів тому +10

      you probably think that's a clever analogy. LOL

    • @CA_I
      @CA_I 11 днів тому +3

      A fire hardly has the same impact as a nuclear disaster, does it?

    • @vipecrx
      @vipecrx 11 днів тому +2

      imagine that fire kept damaging and killing untill way past today.

    • @justliberty4072
      @justliberty4072 10 днів тому +9

      @@CA_I How many people died at, say, Chernobyl, compared to the San Francisco or Chicago fires?

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому +4

      @@CA_I Ask the residents of LA.

  • @FurryEskimo
    @FurryEskimo 13 днів тому +33

    The idea that an entire nuclear reactor’s power is going towards a single company’s servers seems, wild.. How inefficient are these AIs?

    • @gretelgrosse6266
      @gretelgrosse6266 13 днів тому +10

      Extremely inefficient

    • @generalsol1977
      @generalsol1977 13 днів тому +1

      Oh Summer child.... Its not only for A.I., its Datacenters in general... Think CBDC, Crptos, and other defense contractor uses.

    • @nathancochran4694
      @nathancochran4694 13 днів тому +4

      A lot of power requirements for data systems come from the HVAC/server cooling system. Machine Learning is very useful, but it does require a lot of computing power, which requires more computers to do it faster. This generates a ton of heat.

    • @wasgehtsiedasan8660
      @wasgehtsiedasan8660 13 днів тому +4

      Dude what? AI power consumption is extremely efficient. You just need lots and lots of data.

    • @synth1002
      @synth1002 11 днів тому +4

      I thought absolutely that. We are loosing precious electricity for non important things such crypto and AI, while many people can't afford basic heating in the winter because of high prices...

  • @silverbackshooting1563
    @silverbackshooting1563 13 днів тому +83

    I love how the Wall Street Journal tried to make this sound very ominous and scary. Meanwhile, I’m watching this in the chair. Super excited about the future of clean energy.

    • @geneherald8169
      @geneherald8169 13 днів тому

      its because they're pushing the democratic party's agenda. Literally no one died or even got injured in the three mile island incident

    • @alejandroramirez-ih7jv
      @alejandroramirez-ih7jv 13 днів тому +6

      Same here

    • @dasbuilder
      @dasbuilder 13 днів тому +1

      I’m just interested in if they’ll ever replace the controls and other electronic systems? I don’t know how reliable those are and worry about their failure. However, I would think those are built like tanks?

    • @jessvagnar4957
      @jessvagnar4957 13 днів тому +8

      @@dasbuilder Nuclear engineer here. The controls themselves will be retested, documented, and accepted into the program. The controls and systems themselves are not a safety issue. The reinspections are incredibly thorough and involve external personnel and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to ensure there are no deviations that can introduce issues. Areas that are found to be deficient will be repaired or replaced. A lot of the issues TMI will face will be 'catch up maintenance' from a reduced/retired maintenance plan during non-operation. There's an entire industry of specialized tools to check material fatigue, weld integrity, and more across a nuclear reactor!

    • @dasbuilder
      @dasbuilder 9 днів тому

      @@jessvagnar4957 Thank you for the detailed explanation, I appreciate it! That’s pretty awesome how much care is taken to ensure they’ll work.

  • @eduardsdundurs2256
    @eduardsdundurs2256 10 днів тому +18

    60 year old controls and 80 year old operators. match made in heaven

    • @kurtwagner350
      @kurtwagner350 9 днів тому +3

      It unironically is

    • @nicolewembley3093
      @nicolewembley3093 9 днів тому +2

      What could possibly go wrong.

    • @Battleship009
      @Battleship009 8 днів тому +5

      I'm sure those 80 year olds are going to train a much younger generation on the powerplant.

    • @generatorjohn4537
      @generatorjohn4537 8 днів тому +1

      Those operators are mostly ex nuclear US Navy trained. They also must pass NRC qualifications. As far as controls, there is always testing procedures that take place prior to placing a system back in service. I worked in several nuclear power plants in my past career and found them to be the best places (power plants) to work at.

    • @kls2020
      @kls2020 День тому

      @@Battleship009 All of the Nuclear military personnel that were let go due to refusing the VAX are qualified and would probably fill these new job openings = no 80 year olds or clueless youngsters needed .

  • @John_Morrison
    @John_Morrison 11 днів тому +36

    The accident was not caused by a failure of a cooling pump. There was a signal from a pilot operated relief valve that was misinterpreted by the operators, causing them to shut down the emergency cooling pumps, due to a misunderstanding of how the system works. The root cause of the accident was human error. Had the operators done nothing, the reactor would have shut down safely and the accident would never have occured.

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому +3

      Also, the coolant level was calculated based on pressure instead of being directly measured. So when steam built up pressure from a lock of coolant it appeared that there was more coolant than was needed. Which is why they were confused that they temp was rising.

    • @zachzebra56
      @zachzebra56 10 днів тому +1

      Exactly. These 2 factors lead to the control room operator's shutting down all feedwater pumps to prevent the reactor from "going solid" (where the entire primary cooling system blows up from high pressure and water level) They thought by doing so, the situation would improve. When in reality, the reactor fuel rods were exposed at this point. Leading to a partial meltdown that caused radiation to leak, the reactor to be permanently damaged, and a buildup of hydrogen in the vessel that almost lead to a reactor explosion. Like Chernobyl.

    • @John_Morrison
      @John_Morrison 10 днів тому +4

      @@zachzebra56 I see there are some other nuclear accident geeks who really know what they are talking about here😁. I’ve been to three mile (really surprisingly close to the little town) and when things calm down would love to visit Chernobyl, and I have a Japanese friend that swears she can get me into the Fukushima area.🤷‍♂️

    • @zachzebra56
      @zachzebra56 10 днів тому

      @@John_Morrison Thanks! I've done a lot of research of nuclear accidents in the past as well as how a reactor works. Really awesome that you were at Three Mile Island. Hopefully you can visit Fukushima and Chernobyl when it's safe to do so!

    • @paulmea3166
      @paulmea3166 9 днів тому

      Plant operators.... They were the bain of my existence before retirement. Some good, some well.....

  • @pierreboussemart5709
    @pierreboussemart5709 13 днів тому +70

    There's an error at 1:50 in the reactor diagram. The highlighted part is a control rod not a fuel rod. The core with the fuel is below

    • @thejfactor1
      @thejfactor1 9 днів тому +1

      This shows why America does not deserve nuclear energy.

    • @Demonslayer20111
      @Demonslayer20111 9 днів тому

      There are a lot of errors. They highlight the cooling towers as the reactors as well, and claim that three mile released radiation into the air. It didn't, it was contained inside the powerhouse.

    • @thejfactor1
      @thejfactor1 9 днів тому

      @@Demonslayer20111 *containment building

  • @jeffreykalb9752
    @jeffreykalb9752 11 днів тому +21

    There was no melt-down! Just a release of a small amount of radioactive gas!

    • @zachzebra56
      @zachzebra56 10 днів тому +11

      There was a partial meltdown in Unit 2. That lead to a small release of radioactive gases. Though they were able to safely shut the reactor down without further meltdowns. The reactor was permanently damaged as a result and was decommissioned right after the accident.

  • @r.r.r.918
    @r.r.r.918 13 днів тому +64

    What is with the Wall Street Journal and the eerie music, leading to the connotation that nuclear energy is dangerous, which is far from the truth? If you look at the number of people who have died as a result of nuclear energy, including Chernobyl and Fukushima, and then adjust that for the amount of energy generated, nuclear is by far the safest form of energy production, with maybe the exception of solar. I would have expected better from the Wall Street Journal.

    • @justanghozzst8218
      @justanghozzst8218 13 днів тому +7

      WSJ just had a video called "How to Buy Greenland" so I don't know where your trust comes from

    • @wasgehtsiedasan8660
      @wasgehtsiedasan8660 13 днів тому +1

      Deaths/Energy does not seem like a SI unit to me

    • @wintermath3173
      @wintermath3173 13 днів тому

      Further reading ua-cam.com/video/Jzfpyo-q-RM/v-deo.htmlsi=R9nlWnca5u0bTo-e

    • @dafunkmonster
      @dafunkmonster 12 днів тому

      "with maybe the exception of solar."
      Doubt.
      Solar requires mining. Plenty of people have been killed in mines.

    • @CarlGerhardt1
      @CarlGerhardt1 10 днів тому

      Did you know that if you meet someone walking down the street and there's spooky music playing around them, they must be the serial killer the police have been looking for?🤣

  • @makatron
    @makatron 14 днів тому +89

    They keep saying nuclear isn't economically viable, but does provide a dependable energy source that's isolated from market fluctuations and wars that mess with fuel supplies.

    • @Cynthia_Cantrell
      @Cynthia_Cantrell 14 днів тому

      Dude, the US has bought BILLIONS of dollars of nuclear fuel from Russia - $800 million just in 2023. Last time I checked, they were still getting whooped by Ukraine, and we were supplying weapons to Ukraine.

    • @Coldsunscreen
      @Coldsunscreen 14 днів тому +2

      Not entirely true but the concept is correct nuclear would still be impacted by war just not as much as lets say Natural Gas, the U.S at war would switch to what is available and can be managed easily nuclear power plants are large targets they would be targeted first in an attack so whatever is available is what they would use

    • @stevensko9153
      @stevensko9153 14 днів тому +8

      It isn't viable because regulations make it more expensive than it really is. Like everything else, it has to be produced at scale to be cheaper. We can't just build one or two plants. We have to build 20.

    • @AMPProf
      @AMPProf 13 днів тому

      Sooo one corporation to rule them all

    • @Jakob_DK
      @Jakob_DK 13 днів тому

      After the Russian full invasion of Ukraine in 2022. The following nations have used or bought nuclear fuel from Russia.
      Finland, Sweden (defective fuel rods found feb 2022),France, Slovakia, Hungary, USA and more. So where is the independence?

  • @ZachReifsnider
    @ZachReifsnider 13 днів тому +16

    Now that Silicon Valley wants nuclear, it’s ok.

  • @johnjones5354
    @johnjones5354 13 днів тому +15

    While this may be the first decommissioned plant to be restarted, the TVA has restarted plants both at Watts Bar and Browns Ferry after declaring them closed. In the case of Watts bar unit 2, construction was stopped in 1985 (60% complete), restarted in 2007, and was completed in 2015.

  • @g00rb4u
    @g00rb4u 14 днів тому +119

    @0:27 90,000 GW (90 terawatts) is about 75 times the U.S.'s current hourly power usage. The state of education in the U.S. is depressing.

    • @Mike__B
      @Mike__B 14 днів тому +21

      I would probably point to the state of "confusing" energy terms, if I had to guess what was stated was a need for "90,000 giga-watt-hours in 2026" which for a year translates to about 10 GW continuously, however she read "90,000 gigawatts an hour"

    • @lawrencefrost9063
      @lawrencefrost9063 14 днів тому +4

      Those are rookie numbers, you gotta pump those numbers up.

    • @collinw24
      @collinw24 14 днів тому +3

      90 TW is accurate. AI GPUs and POW currencies need energy. Kardashev t1 here we come.

    • @zapfanzapfan
      @zapfanzapfan 14 днів тому +5

      What do you expect from a journalist who probably has a degree in social "science"...

    • @ComfyWagie
      @ComfyWagie 13 днів тому +2

      @@Mike__B Energy terms are only confusing if you failed grade 10 physics.

  • @chiefwild
    @chiefwild 14 днів тому +53

    Why is step 1 putting uranium into the reactor? Wouldn’t you want to first make sure the controls work?

    • @thecrackin-u8p
      @thecrackin-u8p 14 днів тому +6

      Literally should be the last😂

    • @AMPProf
      @AMPProf 13 днів тому

      First you call Scifi channel then you call wsj then A Watch maker.. Finally get back to the Lab gloweing in radiation to say GID SOLUTION WITH rust and Concreates

    • @enricol5974
      @enricol5974 13 днів тому +3

      They tested the controls but you need to make the reactor critical first in order to test dynamically all the rest: cooling systems,pipes and turbines.
      You can always scram the reactor (emergency shutdown) on the spot in case things get ugly.
      Three Miles Island reactor is a better design(PWR) than Chernobyl (RBMK).
      This doesn't mean that accidents can't happen: TMI 2 had a partial meltdown at Three Mile Island in 1979 but it was contained and lessons were learned.
      TMI 1was running until 2019 without problems.
      TMI 1 will be operational by 2028 (that is connected to the grid) and working for the next 20 years according to Constellation.
      Other option is to build a new reactor :it will take 7-14 years .
      17 years and 13 billions USD according to France EDF,

    • @viandengalacticspaceyards5135
      @viandengalacticspaceyards5135 13 днів тому +8

      Step one might better be replacing the control lamp bulbs with LED's.
      Controls look like an early 70's sci-fi series.

    • @HardcoreOntario
      @HardcoreOntario 13 днів тому +2

      Ya no technical knowledge in this video

  • @jjlynchee961
    @jjlynchee961 12 днів тому +10

    There’s been rats chewing on the cable insulation for 20 years. good luck

  • @jonkelly5562
    @jonkelly5562 13 днів тому +6

    The plants are run by a "for profit" company with share holders. The first time that the face a quarter without adequate growth, corners will be cut. It is inevitable.

  • @amirmoezz
    @amirmoezz 14 днів тому +39

    Remember folks, nothing is too expensive, it just may not be profitable enough to invest in.

    • @louf7178
      @louf7178 13 днів тому

      That almost makes sense.

    • @mediocreman2
      @mediocreman2 9 днів тому

      Oh, you mean like Ukraine? That sure wasn't profitable. Great money laundering, though.

  • @jongmassey
    @jongmassey 13 днів тому +12

    90,000GW/h?! That unit makes no sense unless you're talking about the rate of change of power demand

    • @louf7178
      @louf7178 13 днів тому

      Yes. And, no, they weren't.

  • @adammuncy8475
    @adammuncy8475 12 днів тому +34

    Never should have been shut down in the first place!

  • @peghead
    @peghead 9 днів тому +3

    I worked in the nuclear industry for a total of 25+ years beginning in 1982, I've seen the industry improve tremendously and know for a fact that plant operators are thoroughly trained to maintain the plant in a safe condition, I live 6 miles from Three Mile Island with no concerns whatsoever.

  • @mikeklinger1712
    @mikeklinger1712 11 днів тому +3

    The worst part is that it'll power A.I. Here comes Skynet!

  • @viandengalacticspaceyards5135
    @viandengalacticspaceyards5135 13 днів тому +18

    That control room looks like something from my youth, without screens or even LED's.
    I'm 64.

    • @adog7787
      @adog7787 10 днів тому +4

      And still works better

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому +2

      Yep. Most of them were desinged in the 60s and 70s. Can you imagine all the paperwork to try and upgrade a control room for a plant that already had a license issued? Beyond monumental.

    • @ronframe387
      @ronframe387 9 днів тому +1

      And all the switches and gauges are better made than Anything you could buy today!

    • @paulmea3166
      @paulmea3166 9 днів тому

      @@adog7787 If it was maintained. They'll have a real issue getting parts.

    • @paulmea3166
      @paulmea3166 9 днів тому +1

      I've closed down two power plants. All those pneumatic controls and switchgear are going to be an issue. I was getting replacement parts from E-Bay before I retired. Finding Nuclear spec parts are going to be an issue. I'm sure Westinghouse will start a production run for the right price.

  • @permiek
    @permiek 13 днів тому +16

    No government regulation, just profit motive ? What could possibly go wrong.

    • @jessvagnar4957
      @jessvagnar4957 13 днів тому +6

      Literally an entire agency called the Nuclear Regulatory Commission that dictates the entire process independently. They have their own court system, live monitoring systems, and approval processes.

    • @permiek
      @permiek 11 днів тому

      @jessvagnar4957 I thought the whole premise was that the commission had no regulations for restarting a reactor

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому

      @@permiek Restarting a reactor isn't much different than starting a reactor. Your just making sure that a used system meets specifications instead of a new one.

    • @Demonslayer20111
      @Demonslayer20111 9 днів тому

      ​@@permiekno. What they are attempting to do is bring this reactor back online under the existing license. In order to do so, they must meet all specs and regulations said license requires. Wsj is as usual telling half truths.

  • @metalboxman99
    @metalboxman99 14 днів тому +24

    Ai will be a nightmare for humanity. I'm not talking terminator/matrix style, I'm talking reason to get out of bed in the morning style. It will radically destabilize the job market in so many fields & rob people of motivation & ambition to pursue difficult fields of study & art & music...all the while scraping enormous wealth off the top & hoarding it amongst a small handful of people.

    • @TheChiefonator
      @TheChiefonator 14 днів тому

      How is that different from what politicians do anyways?

    • @metalboxman99
      @metalboxman99 14 днів тому +2

      @TheChiefonator politicians are temporary, Ai wont be

    • @TheChiefonator
      @TheChiefonator 14 днів тому

      @@metalboxman99 What if it's just a Chinese room and isn't actually sentient? Also what does this have to do with nuclear energy?

    • @metalboxman99
      @metalboxman99 14 днів тому

      @@TheChiefonator The restarting of Three Mile Island will be just for powering Ai. & They are going to be pushing for more nuclear purely to feed Ai as its constant baseload power. (*not to mention humans in the real world will have to deal with the nuclear waste long term)

    • @wumi2419
      @wumi2419 14 днів тому +2

      ​@@metalboxman99AI stands for All Indians.
      It's a lot of empty promises and hype to make the line go up. Self driving cars still don't exist despite the feature being promised for close to a decade.

  • @FirstNumber1
    @FirstNumber1 13 днів тому +5

    If we fixed things that needed to be fixed in America, things would be a lot better

  • @andrewdubose9968
    @andrewdubose9968 11 днів тому +4

    We need to make it easier to build new reactors. Consider: A Westinghouse A1000 reactor has a core damage frequency of 5.09 × 10^-7.
    What does that mean?
    You walk into a casino and notice a new game called “meltdown”. Meltdown is a very simple game: the dealer shuffles a standard deck of cards and then deals a single card. The house wins if the card is the ace of spades. If it is any other card in the deck, the player wins. After each hand, the dealer puts the card back into the deck and reshuffles.
    Your chances of losing are very low, since a 1 in 52 chance of losing means you win ~98.08% of the time.
    Over the course of 1.96 million hands, the player can expect to lose (1/52) * 1.96 million ≈ 37,692 times.
    Now let’s say your chances of losing are equal to the core damage frequency of a Westinghouse A1000 reactor. Over the course of 1.96 million hands, your expected losses plummet from 37,692 to just _one._
    Note: the core damage frequency of older plants is many orders of magnitude lower than 1 in 52.

  • @zxq_5
    @zxq_5 14 днів тому +16

    "ninety thousand gigawatts per hour"
    ... what? ... uhhhm... are you sure about that one? are you sure that's a real unit of measurement?

  • @cloudchaser907
    @cloudchaser907 13 днів тому +7

    Free health care too expensive

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому

      The worst part is people who think that government run health care would be better than anything else the government runs.

    • @PMaynard-22
      @PMaynard-22 10 днів тому

      no one owes you anything

  • @BrownieX001
    @BrownieX001 13 днів тому +4

    Building new reactors and investing in research for newer tech needs to be supported.

  • @MrWaalkman
    @MrWaalkman 11 днів тому +2

    Wow! @1:02 Those are some old controls in that plant. For reference, we were junking out controls of this vintage in car plants in the late 90's. No big deal you say? Try getting replacements for these devices.

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому

      Try getting the plant licensed with all the modifications to upgrade it. Assuming you can get the new controls to work with the original plant systems.

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому

      There was probably very minimal, if any, oversight and approval from the US Federal Car Plant Agency that had to approve every modification to the controls in that car plant. That is what happens with nuclear plants. Oversight and regulation to death.

    • @MrWaalkman
      @MrWaalkman 10 днів тому +1

      @@Kriss_L Oh I know, but that's not going to make getting spares any more feasible.

    • @MrWaalkman
      @MrWaalkman 9 днів тому

      ​@@Kriss_L There are FMVSS (Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards) rules about how important things like wheels get attached in an auto plant. And that there was a record of it. I'm sure that there was more to the record-keeping side of things, but as a Controls Engineer I didn't need to be aware of anything other than that the Atlas-Copco (early on, later we switched to Cooper) tool monitors were tightening the bolts (and that all of the bolts were getting installed). More precisely, my concern was that the line stopped at the end of the footprint if any operation had not been completed. This applied to quality issues as well as FMVSS ones.
      But I've been told that there is a "Cradle to grave" record on a heck of a lot of things pertaining to your car (for GM at least, I can not comment of other manufacturers since I never worked for them).
      So for us, it was the "if" and not the "how" of the operation that got monitored. Unimportant things (to me) like if the volume knob on the radio got installed or if the light bulb in the ashtray was there or not was left up to Quality to keep straight.
      Which is still not going to make getting replacements for the gear that they have on hand at the nuclear plant any more feasible.
      And after all of these years, I wonder how many of the electronic devices will still work? Batteries (Looking at you, Varta) will have leaked, Tantalum capacitors will blow up, electrolytic caps will have leaked and eaten through the traces on the board. Finishing off what the batteries had started to destroy.
      Controls made before the dawn of the Digital Age will need re-calibration, presumably by techs who are no longer alive. Other devices such as pumps, cooling lines, and ??? will need repair or replacement.
      Get your checkbooks out boys, this is going to be fun... :)

  • @06lbzduramax3500
    @06lbzduramax3500 7 днів тому +2

    I don’t know why but I love those old control panels form the 60s and 70s they look much better than todays boring Digital Touch screens

  • @ChoiceEnvironments
    @ChoiceEnvironments 9 днів тому +3

    Step 1: keep 3/4 of the funds to line your pockets with gold
    Step 2: apparently, keep using the 60 year old controls because there’s not enough money for new ones
    Step 3: fail

  • @dereklenzen2330
    @dereklenzen2330 13 днів тому +7

    0:23 "...who could need over 90,000 gigawatts an hour" 🤦🤦🤦
    Come on, couldn't you get a least one person to proofread this for accuracy? Literally just running the script through GPT-4o before the narrator read it would have picked up on this.

  • @DwipKandar
    @DwipKandar 13 днів тому +67

    if you’re here scrolling, wondering why manifesting hasn’t worked for you, trust me, i was in the same spot. i felt stuck, like no matter how hard i tried, things wouldn’t move forward. then i read Vibrations of Manifestation by Alex Lane, and it broke everything down in a way that clicked. chapter 3 especially changed how i approach my goals-it’s worth every word.

  • @gooadify
    @gooadify 13 днів тому +3

    It really concerns me that the chief generation operator got his explanation of how the generator works wrong…

  • @ThomasWeber-sv8yo
    @ThomasWeber-sv8yo 10 днів тому +4

    A video produced 3 days ago showing a nuclear plant in northern Illinois (Zion NPP) that was torn down 4 years ago...way to go WSJ.

    • @tomd8168
      @tomd8168 3 дні тому

      Yeah I noticed something similar for Florida

  • @DreamPilot64
    @DreamPilot64 12 днів тому +5

    I was an 8th grader in the Harrisburg PA area when that accident happened. Lived about 10 miles from the plant, got out of school early (had no idea why). Nothing resulted from the radioactive steam leak (maybe my sanity has been affected, but.... ). I was wondering if/when someone would start using that site again. They tore down two other cooling towers decades ago.

    • @Demonslayer20111
      @Demonslayer20111 9 днів тому

      Containment was never breached. That relief valve was inside the powerhouse itself, which was designed to contain any radiation leakage.

    • @DreamPilot64
      @DreamPilot64 9 днів тому

      @Demonslayer20111 there was some steam released. Intentionally to reduce pressure. No issues and no major increase in radiation in the area.

  • @wisecracker1
    @wisecracker1 13 днів тому +4

    The 3 Mile Island meltdown in 1979 was caused by frozen T&P Valve just like how my last hot water heater exploded. Lucky theirs was stuck in the open position.

  • @patreilly1458
    @patreilly1458 10 днів тому +4

    So here in Canada the AEC (Atomic Energy Commission) demands that all apparatus and equipment have an Atomic Energy certificate to be allowed to be used in a nuclear plant. To get that certification all parts used in any equipment must be traceable to source and have gone trough a massive ridged testing regime. This is a very expensive and labor intensive requirement for any manufacturer that wants to sell equipment to a nuclear plant. This also causes a lot of problems now. Take instrumentation for power monitoring as one example. In the 1960's and 1970's each function of power monitoring like under voltage or over voltage had a single separate monitor for each of the three phases of AC power production. These monitors were all mechanical in nature with motors linkages and magnets to monitor the power and send a trip signal to the breaker if they went out of tolerance. In the late 1980's the introduction of computer controls and monitoring many companies started making an All In One monitor that looked at the three phase power together with each phase load and would supply online monitoring of that output from a generator. The AEC refused to allow the Nuclear industry to use these monitors because the companies would not go through the testing that the AEC demanded. So the Bruce Nuclear Power plants were still using the old Westinghouse mechanical monitor relays instead of upgrading to the newer systems. Westinghouse said they were NOT going to support those older individual monitors but that did not matter to the AEC. Bruce power was spending $1800 to repair one relay and parts were becoming a problem to source for those repairs. There were 86 of these individual relay monitors on each generator and the costs were out of this world to maintain these old Nuclear rated monitors. For $3,500 one computer based monitor could replace all 86 of those mechanical monitors but the AEC would not allow them. This is just some of the Regulations and idiocy that are limiting the usage of nuclear power. Well you would say this must be done because it is the Nuclear industry but this example is for the downstream equipment where it is the generator of the Steam Turbine that these monitors are on and that did not matter to the AEC that it had nothing to do with the nuclear reactor.

  • @simsnqta
    @simsnqta 10 днів тому +2

    I give this idea a 3.6 score.
    Can't wait for the US version of Chenobyl. 😢

    • @Neozinnn-t9c
      @Neozinnn-t9c 9 днів тому +1

      Something like Chernobyl can't ever happen at actual powerplants we have today. Chernobyl had a core that was incredibly unstable. The PWR type reactors we use aren't capable of ever having a blowout

    • @walden420
      @walden420 9 днів тому

      I live just a couple miles from an active nuclear powerplant running since 1970. Have never had any issues. It provides cheap power without pollution or needing to raze acres of forests for solar panels that only work during the day. They used to give tours of the plant before 9/11.

  • @irvan36mm
    @irvan36mm 9 днів тому +2

    Test, test and retest before loading the first fuel rod

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 9 днів тому

      Test once to make sure all the dashboard lights work... good enough 🙃

    • @Demonslayer20111
      @Demonslayer20111 9 днів тому

      Problem is you can't really test it without criticality. But that isn't an issue, because scramming is always an option if things go wrong.

  • @thedominion6643
    @thedominion6643 14 днів тому +21

    San Onofre next. And extend Diablo Canyon even further than 2030.

    • @AMPProf
      @AMPProf 13 днів тому

      They put radio in my electricity and that sounds right right

    • @gregorymalchuk272
      @gregorymalchuk272 13 днів тому +1

      Diablo Canyon is saved from shutdown and is still under load. San Onofre is very disassembled, but I think the reactor pressure vessel is still in place.

  • @MegaMech
    @MegaMech 12 днів тому +4

    This old, negligent design is just asking for an accident. There's no way to cool the reactor naturally in the event of a thermal event.

  • @mikea.1586
    @mikea.1586 13 днів тому +3

    is no one talking about the fact that a nuclear power plant is going to power up skynet.

  • @ottard
    @ottard 11 днів тому +1

    I would think they replaced the control room equipment completely, but I guess not?

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому +2

      The plant was licensed with the control room as built. It the replaced it, it would have to be reapproved, inspected, tested, and licensed all over again. Maybe 5 to 10 year process.
      And trying to get a modern, comuter controlled, control room to 100% interface with the rest of the plant (as built) might not be possible.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 9 днів тому +1

      Looks like we're stuck with upgraded 1960's tech... sweet 😛 And the fact that the only thing that made this viable in the first place was the insane amount of power the tech industry wants. Meanwhile Germany is scraping much more modern equipment... crazy world.

  • @Kennanjk
    @Kennanjk 13 днів тому +10

    I love old fear mongers saying its never be done cant be done.

    • @civilcivic44
      @civilcivic44 13 днів тому

      those fear mongers are just people of low income areas where the plants and their waste will be located, they will suffer effects from living so close to them

  • @michaelhill6451
    @michaelhill6451 10 днів тому +3

    It's almost as if they shouldn't have shut them down in the first place...

  • @jacobjones7833
    @jacobjones7833 9 днів тому +1

    Some of the blue dots that you have as dormant nuclear power plants are or in the process of being decommissioned as in being dismantled

    • @peghead
      @peghead 9 днів тому

      One in southern PA is Peach Bottom unit 1, an experimental reactor that was dormant since the late 60's or early 70's.

  • @ryanmaris1917
    @ryanmaris1917 12 днів тому +4

    The radiation released from this was about 1 millirem above the natural background dose of 100-125 millirem per year. Its absurd to think that we can't built safe reactors with well trained operators, who won't make the mistakes of the past.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 10 днів тому +1

      They'll make all new mistakes and cost cutting decisions 😛

  • @jmlinden7
    @jmlinden7 14 днів тому +21

    0:29 Gigawatts per hour isn't an actual unit of measurement. It's either just Gigawatts or Gigawatt-hours per hour (both are equal)

    • @imeakdo7
      @imeakdo7 13 днів тому

      Sounds like ai slop

    • @adrianjagielak
      @adrianjagielak 13 днів тому +1

      They didn't even meant power, but rather energy (GWh)

  • @craigsudman4556
    @craigsudman4556 12 днів тому +2

    Oh boy! Can't wait for the bean counters to start saying, "Naw that's too expensive, we don't know what those safety experts do so we don't need them." Those that forget the past are condemned to relive it.

    • @PMaynard-22
      @PMaynard-22 10 днів тому

      Old pant worked fine and should have been restarted ASAP to quell the fear you have today for no real reason, it was operators

  • @allencrider
    @allencrider 7 днів тому +1

    I can get solar panels today for just 17¢ per watt in wholesale quantities. These last about 20 years. How many watts of solar panels can you buy for $1,600,000,000? 😂

  • @brentftaylor
    @brentftaylor 12 днів тому +3

    I worked in Power plant in 1975. You can’t overcome the human factor..

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 10 днів тому +1

      Also the fact that this plant is over 50 years old. What kind of corporate greed corner cutting are they doing to get this thing running? Instead of replacing stuff they are going to "test it" and if it appears to function... hey, we're all good.
      The plant was closed because they were losing money and now the main thing that made it and many other of these relics worth reopening was the extreme power demands from the tech industry. So this is not so much to the benefit of average citizens but to corporate entities (greed) and we are the targets of that greed.

  • @dogwithamug
    @dogwithamug 13 днів тому +8

    Wait are they not updating the systems??

    • @louf7178
      @louf7178 13 днів тому +2

      Defeats the plan of using used equipment.

    • @wasgehtsiedasan8660
      @wasgehtsiedasan8660 13 днів тому

      Ah yes, let's use the system that has been abandoned for years and that nobody truly understands anymore.

    • @dafunkmonster
      @dafunkmonster 12 днів тому +1

      @@wasgehtsiedasan8660 Did you miss the part where they're re-qualifying every component of every system, and how they have site-specific training for all of it?

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 9 днів тому

      Yeah... they're upgrading the 1960's tech... sweet👍 😄 We're the richest country in the world though. And meanwhile, Germany is scraping their much more modern equipment. What a world.

  • @grayrabbit2211
    @grayrabbit2211 12 днів тому +3

    Eh, the Crystal River plant in Florida is never coming back online. Duke Energy went cheap and tried to do upgrades themselves rather than hire a competent contractor and permanently broke it.

    • @MrToradragon
      @MrToradragon 10 днів тому +2

      Is it that plant where they tried to replace steam generator and in the process had damaged the containment building beyond repair?

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 9 днів тому +1

      That's my fear... all these plant reopenings are going to be the quick and cheap option instead of truly modernizing them.

    • @tomd8168
      @tomd8168 3 дні тому

      They're also already in the process of dismantling it. Also it was Progress Energy at the time.

  • @atlasthehatless3624
    @atlasthehatless3624 10 днів тому +2

    A pump never broke a clogged line happened and then the pressurizer valve opend and thats what got stuck happend in 85 at a plant in ohio identical to tmi built by Babcock&wilcox corporation operators there caught it in 30 minutes unlike tmi unit 2 took almost 2 days

  • @JerryDyson-y2k
    @JerryDyson-y2k 8 днів тому +1

    We need to figure this out and restart as many as possible!

  • @al5xdeath
    @al5xdeath 11 днів тому +3

    Nuclear fission technology for the production of electricity is absolutely not a dangerous technology, if you look at the statistics it is one of the safest technologies.

  • @cobracommander.1958
    @cobracommander.1958 13 днів тому +8

    Go hire hommer j simpsson 😂😂😂😂😂😂

    • @louf7178
      @louf7178 13 днів тому

      I see they have the internet on computers, now.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 9 днів тому

      And have replaced the crt monitors 🤣 woo hoo

  • @Enonymouse_
    @Enonymouse_ 13 днів тому +4

    The bigger concerns should be that the entire system design is so outdated it doesnt take into account changes in the geology of the area, the sea level and advances in both reactor design and safety systems. These won't be present when it goes live.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 10 днів тому

      Or how they skimped on replacing old components that "tested" ok because they want it done quick and cheap.

  • @leofortey7561
    @leofortey7561 10 днів тому +2

    It will cost way more than $1.6B. They always go over budget.

  • @Maxhster
    @Maxhster 11 днів тому +2

    people never learn from historical mistakes. Greed rules all

  • @Ozzy-R
    @Ozzy-R 12 днів тому +3

    This article, although good news it has many things not 100% accurate. The 3MI reactor only experienced a partial-meltdown, not a full meltdown like Chernobyl. The narrator also states the consumer will pull equal amount from the grid, actually they will pull what they need at anytime during the day and the load will vary. The plant as any other nuclear plant will be a base load unit which means they are either at full load or offline, no in-between except during startups and shutdowns. People also think that because a customer wants a specific type of generation for their facility that the power company will give them just that. They will put what type they request on the grid but it cannot be directed to their facility.
    So yeah, there are a few more but I will leave it at that. And yes, I have been in the power industry for over 30 years.

    • @PMaynard-22
      @PMaynard-22 10 днів тому

      Base load is good and much needed strange how concept eludes most.

    • @MrToradragon
      @MrToradragon 10 днів тому

      Chernobyl had experienced rather steam explosion and subsequent fire of graphite moderator.

  • @maxmeier3550
    @maxmeier3550 13 днів тому +4

    You do not use "gigawatts an hour". You use gigawatts or gigawatt-hours every hour. GW/hr is a rate of accelerating power use

  • @Hawijack
    @Hawijack 13 днів тому +6

    Restarting these reactors is simply crazy.
    New reactor technology that has developed over the last fifty years is way better way to go if you want to go nuclear.

    • @jessvagnar4957
      @jessvagnar4957 13 днів тому +1

      True, but the cost and timeline are the major considerations here. It's like repaving an existing road, you don't have to replace all the infrastructure and it's already in a convenient grid-supported location. Gen 2 reactors are safe and have plenty of features. The most modern reactor in America is still only a single Gen 3 even while we're constructing test bed systems for MSR/SMR approaches. Vogtle took 15 years of overtures to reach operational state. We haven't finished a single Gen 4/4+.

  • @DeeBrow
    @DeeBrow 13 днів тому +2

    He said nothing about the bean counters. See what bean counters did to Boeing? To the bean counters, a lemonade stand and a nuclear reactor are just numbers in a financial spreadsheet.

  • @HoltAllen
    @HoltAllen 14 днів тому +9

    Are they going to spend the money to modernize the control systems? Everything looks archaic in that plant. No way it can be easy to repair or replace any systems when they fail (no matter how big or small they are).

    • @wasgehtsiedasan8660
      @wasgehtsiedasan8660 13 днів тому

      Yes, I agree. Working with an old abandoned system is a nightmare. They should bring down the plant and build it from scratch.

    • @PMaynard-22
      @PMaynard-22 10 днів тому

      Ya ok mostly analogue is super complex.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 10 днів тому

      I just watched a Kyle Hill video that briefly showed a MODERN reactor control room simulator in Germany... compared to this 50 year old dinosaur 😵‍💫 yikes what a different. And the one in Germany will scraped soon 😵‍💫 I just feel like they are going to go cheap and quick to get these plants running again all across the US instead of truly modernizing them. The video is titled World's Only GLASS Nuclear Reactor! ... it's 11 minutes in.

    • @paulmea3166
      @paulmea3166 9 днів тому

      They probably can't and keep the same license. Repairing what they have will have major parts availability issues.

  • @ttc5000
    @ttc5000 13 днів тому +19

    What cracks me up about all of this is that we are restarting all these nukes for clean energy, but what are we actually using them for? Data centers. People want me to drive a glorified golf cart, but no one blinks an eye at using an ENTIRE nuclear plant to back a data center.

    • @TheRealCharlieSuper
      @TheRealCharlieSuper 13 днів тому

      Because a nuclear power plant is *relatively* safer than a coal/natural gas power plant. That, and taking out a large swath of forest land for a wind or solar farm would be prohibitive compared to their appearance of being "green." Until an AI bust, data centers are going to be more prevalent power consumers.

    • @jessvagnar4957
      @jessvagnar4957 13 днів тому +1

      @@TheRealCharlieSuper I think the contention was what value is the AI datacenter providing society vs the sacrifice ttc5000 made driving a golf cart. Restart the nuclear reactors for clean energy, but don't expand the datacenter and you have an actually greener society. If we presuppose the creation of these AI datacenters it removes the point of the personal sacrifice.

    • @ttc5000
      @ttc5000 12 днів тому

      @@TheRealCharlieSuper The point is, where is the public outcry for how much energy these things are consuming at a time when we are supposedly cutting back? If we are using the nukes to power data centers, then that means we are using fossil to charge &*$%^& electric cars

    • @mikeshotrodshop
      @mikeshotrodshop 12 днів тому +1

      If they want to start up more reactors, the energy should go to the American public, not an evil empire.

    • @andrewdubose9968
      @andrewdubose9968 11 днів тому

      The xAI Colossus cluster in Memphis, Tennessee is the world's largest H100 GPU cluster, with 100,000 Nvidia H100 GPUs. Its power draw is expected to ramp up to 150 MW.
      Three mile island has 800 MW of generating capacity, meaning the *extra* capacity is enough to supply ~300,000 homes.

  • @dansnow7840
    @dansnow7840 13 днів тому +18

    If nuclear power is going to be turned back on, let it power American homes. Microsoft buying this solely for AI servers is beyond dystopian, pure madness. These tech businessmen have so grossly oversold AI to investors. I give this project 10 years

    • @TheRealCharlieSuper
      @TheRealCharlieSuper 13 днів тому +5

      The best part, if/when MS decides they overestimated AI; it's not owned by MS, one can assume that constellation would offload said power to the grid for general use.

    • @dafunkmonster
      @dafunkmonster 12 днів тому

      " Microsoft buying this solely for AI servers is beyond dystopian, pure madness."
      I don't think you understand what's happening here.
      Microsoft has projected how much additional demand they're going to add to the grid. This project is going to increase supply to offset that demand.

    • @FatherMolonLabe187
      @FatherMolonLabe187 12 днів тому +4

      @@dafunkmonster Correct, which means the net benefit of energy costs to the public is zero. A private entity benefits while the risk is socialized - in other words, dystopian.

    • @PMaynard-22
      @PMaynard-22 10 днів тому

      @@FatherMolonLabe187 If they are paying for project, it's still benefit to you because you didn't pay for added capacity on the grid.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 10 днів тому +1

      But the power company is paying for the project with Microsoft being the main customer. If it wasn't for tech industries massive energy consumption, this project would not have been economically feasible or profitable. So do you think restarting this plant will make residential energy bills go down, stay the same or go up? And when the plant finally closes who pays for the decommissioning?

  • @marlow769
    @marlow769 9 днів тому +1

    I think they’re downplayIng what happened at TMI. It’s true that it wasn’t even on the same scale as Chernobyl. What is also true is that the distinction was mostly due to luck, not some sort of superior knowledge, skill or engineering. TMI was a near meltdown situation - not to be dismissed as some sort of success story in relation to Chernobyl.

  • @HarbingerOfManagedDemocracyy
    @HarbingerOfManagedDemocracyy 5 днів тому +1

    3 mile island was such a catastrophe that a decent portion of our country is uninhabitable, oh wait that was in the ussr.

  • @ErikTheAndroid
    @ErikTheAndroid 12 днів тому +5

    Nuclear power is by far the greenest and most effective form of power generation that we have. I am glad to see that the tide is finally turning back in the right direction.

  • @Bobrogers99
    @Bobrogers99 13 днів тому +5

    I presume that they will add redundant cooling systems so that the breakdown of one pump won't result in another overheating incident.

    • @jerm8146
      @jerm8146 13 днів тому +5

      The explanation in the video was extremely condensed because a full technical explanation would lose most people. The issue was far more complex than what they portrayed and not caused by a single pump failure. Multiple errors plus a design flaw all came together to cause this accident. It's honestly one of those "go buy a lottery ticket" situations because so many things just happed to align that it seems implausible. The industry learned a huge amount from this accident. They retrofitted their plants to reduce the risk, and operators are still HEAVILY trained on the lessons learned at TMI-2.

    • @leaf16nut
      @leaf16nut 13 днів тому +2

      Naaaah, what's the chances it happens TWICE?

    • @blakem9109
      @blakem9109 13 днів тому +5

      Unit 1 was upgraded from the lessons learned by the unit 2 accident before it restarted in 1985. Unit 1 then operated safely till 2019. It will be upgraded again based on industry experience from 2019 till it come back online.

    • @louf7178
      @louf7178 13 днів тому

      Value engineered that out.

    • @perryallan3524
      @perryallan3524 13 днів тому +5

      Retired nuclear plant engineer here. All nuclear power plants in the USA have always been built with redundant pumps. The initial plants had to have 2 100% capable pumps. Later designs have to have 3 100% capable redundant pumps.
      Also, key is that the pump did not fail. An operator intentionally turned it off because they did not understand the condition of the reactor and other factors (key is that there was now a steam bubble in the reactor which created a water level). Had they left the pump, which had properly auto-started due to the shutdown, there would have been no partial meltdown. There was no instrumentation for water levels in reactors in those days as the reactor is expected to be 100% flooded except during refueling outages.
      After TMI the US NRC, and most countries in the world, required multiple redundant reactor water level systems be retrofitted on existing power plants, and be designed into all new reactors.

  • @illinois_b
    @illinois_b 13 днів тому +8

    While I’m generally pro-business, I have to ask myself, “why do I not believe the executive wearing a hard hat telling us how safe everything is?”

    • @joe18750
      @joe18750 13 днів тому

      because you've been brainwashed to believe nuclear power is unsafe.

  • @merkeet
    @merkeet 10 днів тому +1

    So basically power, data, privacy, carbon tax and health hazards are the cost we have in order to let Microsoft operate.

  • @actionA06
    @actionA06 9 днів тому +1

    Why waste that money restarting a Model T when you can build a Ferrari . You are so far behind on modern nuke plants .

  • @cuddlepoo11
    @cuddlepoo11 13 днів тому +7

    And the driving force of how much safety? Same as always. Profits.

  • @dilara4130
    @dilara4130 13 днів тому +322

    I'm planning to retire at 59 in another country outside the US that is free, safe and very cheap with a high quality of life and good healthcare. I could fully just rely on only my SS if I wanted to when that times arrives but l'll also have at least one pension, a 403 (b) and a very prolific Investment account with my Stephanie Stiefel my FA. Retiring comfortably in the US these days is almost impossible

    • @DaraangelyHarvie
      @DaraangelyHarvie 13 днів тому

      I know this lady you just mentioned. Stephanie Janis Stiefel is a portfolio manager and investment advisor. She gained recognition as an employee of neuberger berman; a renowned investor she is. Stephanie Janis Stiefel has demonstrated expertise in investment strategies and has been involved in managing portfolios and providing guidance to clients.

    • @KarencitaSacher
      @KarencitaSacher 13 днів тому

      I’m planning on moving to Thailand in the next 5 years if trump’s government doesn’t do anything with the high prices of groceries and taxes
      What about you??

    • @LuuzbelitoPirogovsky
      @LuuzbelitoPirogovsky 13 днів тому

      I went from no money to Invest with to busting my A** off on Uber eats for four months to raise about $20k to start trading with Stephanie Janis Stiefel. I am at $128k right now and LOVING that you have to bring this up here

    • @emmabeyza6036
      @emmabeyza6036 13 днів тому

      My sister lives in Aussie. They have good healthcare better than America. I am also moving there after I retire.

    • @JessieeAlmar
      @JessieeAlmar 13 днів тому

      Please let’s stop gentrifying countries

  • @TheChiefonator
    @TheChiefonator 14 днів тому +28

    Lots of Not in my backyard going on from the keyboard warriors here.

    • @Coldsunscreen
      @Coldsunscreen 14 днів тому +4

      From people who probably don't even live within 5 hours of this plant let alone on this side of the globe.

    • @laborspy
      @laborspy 14 днів тому +12

      This is officially 15mins from my house .. should never of been shut down. Speed it up let’s gooo.

    • @motrhead69
      @motrhead69 13 днів тому +2

      Im 5 miles/ eye shot 2 large cooling towers from my window from my home and I have to say I do get worried,either case there is a 10 mile exclusion zone IF a accident should arise and that doesn't give me reassurance, last issue was in 66 and it was relatively light,but it can be safe if people are trained correctly.

  • @georgewilhelmsen9344
    @georgewilhelmsen9344 6 днів тому

    Okay, 43 year nuclear employee here. Including from 2012 to 2020 at Fort Calhoun, Braidwood and Byron Stations.
    60 year old controls? No, not really. The hand switches and indicating light fixtures, maybe. The recorders, controllers, all of those have been replaced multiple times.
    The NRC licensing process is PAINFUL and EXPENSIVE. Want to know why nuclear plants cost so much? It's the REGULATIONS, folks. So TMI is just fine to restart.
    Nuclear plants (post TMI-2 accident, now post-Fukushima accident) are more safe than ever before. Have we had an accident on US soil since TMI? NO. Did we have some near-missed? Yes. Davis Besse being the worst of them, and guess what? The PEOPLE behind that can no longer work in the industry. Try that penalty on for size.
    The bottom line is this: TMI is safe, and it ran at levels which were EXCELLENT until it was shut down because the US government insisted on distorting the energy market with subsides favoring wind and solar, which mean you subsidize wind and solar and pay them twice - once as a ratepayer, and once as a TAXPAYER because they can't make money otherwise, and good running nuclear plants like TMI, Kewaunee, Palisades, Duane Arnold and others get shut down because they can't compete against government subsidies.
    Relax. It will be fine. I'll stake my reputation on it.

  • @Acoustic_Theory
    @Acoustic_Theory 10 днів тому +2

    This is a poor summary. The first step is to check everything, which they are doing, then the second step is to pressure test the two coolant circuits to make sure they can withstand the operating pressures that will be present, plus a safety margin. Putting uranium back into the reactor is the last step before restarting, not the first one.

    • @phiksit
      @phiksit 9 днів тому

      How do you even inspect the hot side corrosion or deficiencies?

    • @kaspervestergaard2383
      @kaspervestergaard2383 9 днів тому

      @@phiksit You send in the dwarfs.

  • @skier222
    @skier222 14 днів тому +14

    It's totally on vibes, but I don't like this guy from Constellation. He strikes me as exactly the kind of "suit in a hard hat" that touts a watertight plan when I'm sure there's nuance and risk behind the scenes. I want to hear from the scientists and engineers about why we should have confidence, not the executive with money on the line.

    • @filipporiva1864
      @filipporiva1864 13 днів тому

      nuclear engineering student here, what do you want to know?

    • @skier222
      @skier222 13 днів тому +1

      @@filipporiva1864 haha thanks for the comment. I more want insights from the people literally working on the TMI reactor - the folks who have poured over the design documentation, assessed the current condition of the hardware, etc.
      I'm an engineer too and I think we all have seen the difference between what the folks behind the scenes say versus what the executives say.

    • @filipporiva1864
      @filipporiva1864 13 днів тому

      @@skier222 probably if you search somewhere on the DOE site there are safety assessments of the exact kind you’re searching for. Maybe all the documents are still being produced, but usually there’s a section for this kind of stuff

    • @louf7178
      @louf7178 13 днів тому +1

      You must know that that role isn't the same as EE, structural engineer, nuclear engineer. High levels "should" be fielding general direction aspects.

  • @WillJBailey
    @WillJBailey 13 днів тому +7

    And where does all the waste go?

    • @tarron8785
      @tarron8785 13 днів тому +1

      Magic!!!
      🥸
      Nah, more seriously, probably some third world country that gets bribed into taking it. Very fair. Very ethical.

    • @uba5578
      @uba5578 13 днів тому +10

      @@tarron8785Wrong. High-level nuclear waste is usually stored onsite or sent to underground repositories in the US. There really isn’t much of it as well.

    • @FredroStarr12
      @FredroStarr12 13 днів тому +2

      @@tarron8785 gets sent to underground storage to decay slowly

    • @raycarnis9540
      @raycarnis9540 13 днів тому +2

      Mr. Burns keeps it in his shed.

    • @blakem9109
      @blakem9109 13 днів тому

      It sits onsite in casks until we can get politicians that have enough leadership to come up with a more permanent solution. Also, fun fact, all nuclear fuel in the US is government owned.

  • @stevestretch6052
    @stevestretch6052 10 днів тому +6

    As an electrician that works on nuclear refueling outages, among other work including in the control room. The controls look the same in every control room I've seen. I look forward to working on TMI

    • @Kriss_L
      @Kriss_L 10 днів тому +2

      Maybe because they were all designed about the same time.

    • @peghead
      @peghead 9 днів тому

      I've worked in control rooms as well after analog systems were replaced/updated to digital instruments, as I'm sure you can attest. Improvements and updating systems are a constant mission in all U.S. nuclear power plants, everyone can rest easy.

  • @Killerthemerc
    @Killerthemerc 6 днів тому +1

    Welp apparently corporations haven't learned from the past if the reactor nearly melted down once it can happen again lets hope they never restart reactor 2

  • @BlackRoostar-cf2yv
    @BlackRoostar-cf2yv 11 днів тому +2

    So Microsoft already has the plant going, this is just the announcement to brag. Yawn. Rules for thee......

  • @UXXV
    @UXXV 13 днів тому +5

    Nearly half a century old and abandoned nuclear control systems and pipework being quickly checked and used. This seems insane. I wouldn’t pull an abandoned 50 year old washing machine out and use it let alone a nuclear reactor.

    • @perryallan3524
      @perryallan3524 13 днів тому +2

      Retired nuclear plant engineer here. It was only shut down in 2019, and there was a small active staff monitoring the plant and maintaining and operating key safety systems required to cool the water in the Spent fuel pool and radiation safety.
      All procedures and documents exist due to storage requirements.
      I'm quite sure that there was no significant degradation of any key components due to the materials and deign of nuclear power plants (virtually all nuclear safety systems are built from SS or more exotic alloys). Main steam piping and turbine casings are very thick even if they are carbon steel.
      Most of what is likely to have degraded in 5 years is relatively minor to replace or rebuild.

    • @UXXV
      @UXXV 13 днів тому

      @ this video was so badly put together it appeared it was a derelict site that was mothballed! 🙈

    • @dafunkmonster
      @dafunkmonster 12 днів тому +3

      "I wouldn’t pull an abandoned 50 year old washing machine out and use it let alone a nuclear reactor."
      That's because you've been thoroughly programmed by advertisers to crave the next big thing.
      A 50 year old washing machine would have been built like a tank, using heavy gauge steel for the enclosure, and using dead-simple controls. Even if it wasn't functional, you could refurbish it for dozens of dollars.

    • @UXXV
      @UXXV 12 днів тому

      @ not quite sunshine. Also finding someone to refurb to operating condition with suitable parts and guarantee it for use would negate getting something that worked from this millennium.

    • @perryallan3524
      @perryallan3524 12 днів тому

      @ The USA and much of the rest of the world is successfully operating a lot or nuclear power plants from that era as many companies that served nuclear power plants still do production runs (but the parts are expensive). Thus key parts are still available and the knowledge of how to refurbish the equipment is standard in the industry.